Giampaolo Rodola' <g.rod...@gmail.com> added the comment: This is what I get by using bench.py script attached to issue13451:
CURRENT VERSION (NO LOCK) test_cancel : time=0.67457 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 test_empty : time=0.00025 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 test_enter : time=0.00302 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 test_queue : time=6.31787 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 test_run : time=0.00741 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 LOCK WITH DECORATOR (no synchronization) test_cancel : time=0.70455 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 test_empty : time=0.00050 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 test_enter : time=0.00405 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 test_queue : time=6.23341 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 test_run : time=0.00776 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 LOCK WITHOUT DECORATOR (always synchronized) test_cancel : time=0.69625 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 test_empty : time=0.00053 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 test_enter : time=0.00397 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 test_queue : time=6.36999 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 test_run : time=0.00783 : calls=1 : stdev=0.00000 Versions #2 and #3 have the same cost, so it's better to get rid of the explicit argument and always use the lock (version #3). Differences between #1 and #3 suggest that introducing the lock obviously have a cost though. It's not too high IMO, but I couldn't say whether it's acceptable or not. Maybe it makes sense to provide it as a separate class (SynchronizedScheduler). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue8684> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
